- (1.) The tenant-petitioners have filed this revision petition against the order of the appellate authority dated 9th February, 1978, whereby the order of the Rent Controller, directing their ejectment was maintained.
(2.) The premises in dispute is a portion of the house shown in the plan, Exhibit A2. The ejectment has been sought on the ground of non payment of rent and on the ground of bonafide requirement of the landlord for his own use and occupation. Both these grounds were contested by the tenants in their written statement. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were farmed :- 1. Whether the respondents are liable to be ejected fron the premises in question on the grounds given in the application 2. Whether the respondents from a joint Hindu Family If so, its effect. On issue No. 1 the Rent Controller came to the conclusion the the tender offered by the tenants in 20th July, 1976 was illegal and invalid, and, consequently decided issue No. 1 against the tenants. On issue No. 2, the finding was in favour of the landlord, as it was held that he bonafide require the premises for his own use and occupation. In appeal, both these findings have been affirmed by the Appellate Authority. Feeling aggrieved against the concurrent finding of both the authorities, the tenants have come in revision to this court under Section 15 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find any merit in this petition. Admittedly, on 22nd March, 1976, Rs. 1055.25 were assessed as areas of rent, interest and costs by the Rent Controller as contempated under Section 13(2)(i) of the Act and the next date fixed for tender was 5th April, 1976. On that date, the Rent Controller was on leave and the case was thus adjourned for proper orders on 19th April, 1976. Admittedly, no amount was paid or tendered either on 5th April, 1976 or on 19th April, 1976. The Presiding Officer, i.e. Rent Controller joined his duties on 21st June, 1976; whereas the amount assessed was tendered on 20th July, 1976 when the case again came before him after availing the leave. This tender on 20th July, 1976, has been held to be illegal and invalid by the Rent Controller. Section 13(2)(i) of the Act contemplates that if the tenants within a period of fifteen days of the first hearing of the application for ejectment after due service, pays or tenders the arrears of rent and interest, to the calculated at 8 percent per annum on such arrears together with such costs, if any, as may be allowed by the Controller, the tenant shall be deemed to have duly paid or tendered the rent within the time aforesaid. Admittedly, no payment or tender was made within the prescribed i.e. 15 days as contemplated in the said provisions. The arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the tender could not be made earlier because Presiding Officer was on leave, has no force. It is the statutory requirement that the arrears are to be apply or tendered within 15 days after the assessment is made by the Rent Controller. Non-compliance thereof disentitles the tenants to take benefit thereof, disentitles the tenants to take benefit of the proviso under Section 13(2)(i) of the Act. Thus, the authorities below have rightly found that the tender made on 20th July, 1976, was illegal and invalid.;